Friday, February 20, 2015

1.It’s NOT
final. In the rush to have the fastest kneejerk in the west various
marijuana activists have been trying to exploit insider connections to provide
the activist community w the supposed latest “final” version of MPP’ ballot
measure draft before it gets filed. This “final draft” was leaked late Sunday afternoon,
online before evening was out and officially refuted as “final” before coffee-break
Monday morning. It does reflect substantial revisions from the draft of
1/26/15, most of which are good news for Safer AZ’s mission. Industry leaders
however still have much to settle in establishing the regulatory structure.

2.It’s Still
Homegrown. Despite concerns over polling, MPP has consistently stuck to
their commitment to personal grow rights. The numbers look like this: 6 plants
per person, 12 per household. You get to keep all the marijuana produced on the
premises as well, so this means in all practicality, marijuana possession
levels will be only related to public possession, since all the marijuana on
one’s property could have been produced in earlier grows. With the possibility
of limited cultivation licenses in the fee schedule, anyone whose thumb isn’t
green enough w 12 plants should be able to buy their way into the industry. But
don’t kid yourself, compliance regulations for marijuana establishments are
designed to weed out the illegal and inept. Bartering between friends will be
legal however, so the desires of most backyard gardeners will be protect.
Beyond that, hey, get a license.

3.It’s No Gamble. After being roundly
rejected by most quarters of AZ’s marijuana community (activists and
industry-types alike) the proposal that adult use marijuana licensing should be
run through the Dept. of Gaming is scrapped. Licensing will continue in DHS
(Dept. of Health & Human Services) till July 1 of 2018, when all marijuana
licensing, medicinal and adult use, will be regulated by the newly created,
Dept. of Marijuana.

4.It’s
Bullet-Proof. One of the biggest challenges to creating citizens’ initiatives
in AZ is creating a set of rules that have to fiddle-proof to prevent
legislators of various intentions from being able to make substantial changes to
the program, yet supple enough to adjust to actual unforeseen complexities of
governing such an industry. Looking to the as-of-yet unassailable Clean Elections
Commission structure with a non-partisan political appointment process and
internal reviews procedures. The structure should be ironclad when comes to
outside forces and empowered to create the complex regulatory structure that
will protect consumers and not hamstring the industry as it builds itself.

5.Is Hemp
Legal? Though this ballot measure is designed to govern marijuana, an
interesting development between the 1/26/15 and the 2/15/15 draft is the
addition of the words “should be legal” into the paragraph in the finds section
on Hemp. The earlier version of the sentence said “hemp should be regulated
separately from” the more THC-laden strains of cannabis (i.e. marijuana). That
passage now reads “the people of the State of Arizona further find and declare
that hemp should be legal and should be regulated separately from” the THC strains
of cannabis (36-2820.4) Later in the document (2822.6) it permits the state
legislature to regulate and tax hemp. In the personal use and cultivation
section a person’s right to “possess, produce, process, manufacturer, purchase,
obtain, sell or otherwise transfer, or transport industrial hemp” is explicitly
affirmed (2831.3). A lot obviously hangs on the difference between the meanings
of the words “shall” & “should,” as “hemp shall be legal” v “hemp should be
legal,” so for now we are asking for clarification.

6.What is a
Plant? Home cultivators around the state appreciate the distinctions between
a seedling, a clone, a vegetative state plant or one in full flower. Only the
later has appreciable THC levels. Currently the definitions section defines “Industrial
Hemp” (2821.4) & marijuana sort of (2821.7) by identifying what it is not,
for example hemp. But if hemp is defined as a low-level THC cannabis plant,
what about THC-heavy strains prior to their flowering state when they are still
low-level THC bearing?

7.Forgot
About Dre? One of the original concerns of Safer AZ, and the activist
community as a whole, has been addressing: the damage already done to the tens
of thousands of Arizonans who have been collateral damage in the War on Drugs,
is still MIA. Post conviction relief, record expungement and current prisoner
resentencing options are not in the language and, so far, unlikely to be added.
Legislative fixes similar to Mark Cardenas’ 2014 bill HB2474 might be the only
way to get justice for those whose lives are forever scarred by prohibition.
Some of us can’t forget the past or that this language forgets to fix it.

8.THC &
CPS? One of the most egregious acts of AZ’s scandal ridden Child Protective
Services agency has been their targeting of parents w mmj cards. Already a
national epidemic, CPS agencies around the country contend that parents w
marijuana charges or even mmj cards are drug dependent and neglecting their
kids, no matter the reality of the circumstances. While anecdotal evidence is
strong, CPS denies such evidence, but the new law should end any questions of cannabis
and kids: “No person may be denied custody of or visitation or parenting time
with a minor, and there is no presumption of neglect or child endangerment for
conduct allowed under this chapter, unless the person’s behavior creates an
unreasonable danger to the safety of the minor as established by clear and
convincing evidence.” (2831.4)

9.The No-Zone
Layer. Beyond the state laws regarding the various aspects of marijuana
regulation, the ballot measure clearly establishes the ability of local
jurisdictions to have “local control” in regulating marijuana in their cities.
While earlier drafts included provisions allowing cities to control the transportation of marijuana in their
zoning jurisdictions have been struck, cities can still regulate “the smoking,
production, processing, and manufacturing of marijuana when it is injurious to
the environment or otherwise is a nuisance to a considerable number of persons”
(2827.2a).

10.Schooled
on “School” a final clarification from earlier drafts is that the word “school”
is clarified to mean K-12 and younger educational facilities. Colleges,
technical institutes and adult learning facilities would still be able to
regulate cannabis on their properties, but not w the weight of felony arrest
behind them.

Friday, February 13, 2015

Safer AZ has continued to represent the AZ cannabis
community at large in our negotiations with MPP on the language of their new
ballot measure. The following is a result of our negotiations w MPP and with
our lawyer Tom Dean’s work on the drafting committee. This updates the Feb. 8th
report available here.

Many know that a huge factor in shaping the language on the
issue of citizens’ rights to produce their own cannabis at home was the
question of how well the issue polled among the general public. While few
marijuana users opposed personal grow, MPP and those investing in their ballot
measure will act based on the interests of the larger Arizona voting community.
With a campaign of more than $2 million at stake, it is small wonder polling
was closely watched on the question.

A separate poll was done in late December, early January, that
included questions on legalization, which indicated that personal grow rights
would have a significant negative impact on the likelihood of passage. The initial assertion by some was that the
polling said home grow had to be cut from the language before the final draft
was filed.

Update—Rob Kampia
the leader of MPP has rejected the early poll results and MPP is paying for a
poll that is being conducted during the middle two weeks of February. Inside
track says that despite concerns in the AZ mmj industry, MPP is committed to
keeping personal grow in the language at all costs. The results of the poll
will be available by the end of February and the finalized language will be
filed in early March at the outside.

Issues of Concern in
Current Language

Following an aggressive round of public presentations, Safer
AZ identified widespread support for several provisions:

What’s Good

By and large this draft satisfies many of the concerns Safer
AZ had about grow rights and small business access. DUI provisions are good;
citizen grow rights include possessing ALL the marijuana produced on personal
premises; protections for marijuana accessory use and promotion.

But also a series of specific concerns:

What’s Bad

The shift of licensing for adult
use marijuana from DHS to Department of Gaming, means a delay in new license
implementation until June of 2019 and that existing marijuana establishments
will have to apply for entirely separate licensing to expand into the adult
market. This will prohibit new investment into both the ballot measure’s
campaign and the industry. Unspecified penalties for larger possession and
“intent to distribute” offenses means those charges revert to existing state
statutes and remain severe felonies.

And called for revisions:

A)keeping licensing for all marijuana
establishments in the existing DHS structure

Update:
responding to widespread concerns, the draft currently will retain licensing in
DHS until a separate Department of Marijuana can be created.

B)excluding adult learning facilities from
prohibited locations

Update:
no change in language at this time, though an AMMA case current pending before the
state supreme court could rule that adult learning facilities such as colleges
and trade schools could be exempted under the AMMA and similar protections
could be argued here.

C)explicitly including the limited license fee
schedule in the fee section

Update:
the limited cultivation license fee listing is currently scheduled to be
included.

Update:
Under consideration, but a chief MPP concern has to do w accusations of interstate
commerce and with out of state pot dealers tourist shopping their way across
the state. There is a possibility of gaining ground on this issue.

E)requiring housing discrimination against
cannabis be explicitly written into housing leases:

Update:
Under consideration

F)listing penalties for larger possession (greater
than one ounce) and “intent to distribute,” and having those penalties be
misdemeanors. Doing business without a license should result in civil
penalties, not criminal ones.

Update:
Misdemeanor penalties for possession up 2lbs in public is under consideration.
Personal cultivation possession rights imply unlimited possession of marijuana
has been cultivated on premises. There will be no extension of protections for
unlicensed sale and trafficking of marijuana. Sharing between friends shall be
protected.

G)Protections from potential unreasonable local
restrictions on private consumption and transportation of marijuana

3.Language protecting home cultivators from the
implied distinction between “concrete possession” and “actual possession.” An
example of why this is a problem: If two people have 6 plants each and live in
the same house, if the plants are co-mingled could either person be charged w
possessing all 12 plants? What if a person had 12 plants at their household and
was assisting someone at a separate location with their plants. Is that person
now in possession of both sets of plants? This issue can be settled with some
simple clarifying language.

4.Parenting and discrimination protections similar
to, though stronger than, those in the AMMA. Currently CPS can assert an
automatic “neglect finding” if a parent is found with marijuana or even
declares they have a medical card. We are calling for explicit protections that
state “custody shall not be disturbed” for the legal possession and usage of
marijuana by parents.

Update:
Being revised. This specific passage has been cited for strong protections in
the upcoming draft.

Sunday, February 8, 2015

Safer AZ has consistently worked as a cooler head in the
ongoing negotiations between the various factions involved in AZ’s marijuana
movement. From dispensary lawyers to disabled vets, Safer AZ has listened to
all sides and tried to bridge gaps when possible. Our commitment to communications
is helping break the paranoia cycle that so often cripples negotiations.

Safer Arizona went to Kingman and challenged Matforce in
Mohave; and on the same day had our season kick-off event in Tempe

Safer organized a major demonstration at AZ state capitol which
got nationwide attention and scooped statehouse opening day coverage in 10
separate articles.

Safer AZ created 4 large scale pro-marijuana prop signs,
including a legalization sign signed by 100s in the first month alone. In
addition we have amassed the materials for 100s more signs. All we need is the
labor.

Our “Safer Bowl Sunday” literally touched tens of thousands
of football fans when we set up at the Glendale Ave entrance to Cardinal
Stadium. Hundreds posed w our signage including Glendale PD and countless
Seattle Seahawks fans thrilled to see our pro-marijuana display.

Safer AZ developed a calendar of legislative activities w 4
full-scale meetings w state legislators and introductory meetings with another
15 more. All in all Safer Arizona has now met w 27 legislators so far this
session and is actively scheduling meetings for any citizen wanting to meet w
their own representatives or senator.

Operating as registered lobbyists, Safer Arizona represented
the interests of small mmj entrepreneurs at the state capitol, w
representatives of various Indian nations, at Tempe City Council, at the
statewide convention of the Democratic Party, and in the press in multiple
articles.

Safer made presentations to 9 different groups on MPP’s new
ballot measure, including presentations to groups of 20+ in Prescott Valley,
Glendale, PHX, & Tempe and filmed a summary for You Tube.

Safer AZ does weekly tabling at the Saturday 710 Lounge
farmers’ market and the Sunday farmers’ market at Lax Life also. Twice a week
Safer is in the heart of the PHX cannabis community, sharing information and
making presentations.

Safer AZ took actions to protect the homeless population in
Tucson and intervened in a human trafficking incident.

Safer AZ coordinates w Hemp Our World and their new
executive director, Michael Jacobs, to get their new hemp ballot measure
campaign up and operational.

Safer AZ begins negotiations to promote and distribute two
cannabis documentaries: Culture High (214), What If Cannabis Cured Cancer
(2010). Currently plans are in the works for a showing of Culture High in PHX
at Film Bar, in Tucson, & Tempe. We
have been provided w copies of What If … by the director’s estate for our
fundraising and educational projects. Briefly we were involved in
pre-production on a documentary on the AZ movement, but that fell through.

Separately Safer AZ produced a series of instructional You
Tube videos on various topics over the past month, including breakdowns on
bills at the statehouse and MPP’s current draft of their legalization
initiative.

Safer AZbegan developing a national network of cannabis
political activist groups, including leaders in Kentucky, Georgia, Idaho &
Oklahoma, to create a national grassroots coalition to provide nationwide help
for state level legalization activities.

Safer AZ sold another 100 tee-shirts and is placing an order
for 150 more.

Having attempted to run our own ballot measure during the
2014 election cycle and being intimately aware of the problematic 2010 MPP AMMA
Prop 203 campaign, we at Safer Arizona took a very keen interest in MPP’s
progress. Our community instructed us to hold to 3 criteria: home-grow rights, basic
civil rights protections & small business opportunity. Safer Arizona is lucky to have our lawyer, the
nationally renowned Tom Dean, represent us on the drafting committee. Dean was
able to prepare extensive notes for the committee on aligning their proposed
language with existing state statute. The draft we are reviewing here is the 3rd
or 4th draft depending on how one judges such things in a constantly
evolving document. The document is currently referred to as Title 36, Chapter
28.2.

Disclaimer: The
summary below is in no way all inclusive and represents the opinion of Safer AZ
staff.

Summary:

Findings (2820) The
initiative will amend existing state laws regarding marijuana found in sections
ARS13-3401 & 3405. The Findings section (essentially a section explaining the
philosophy and intentions of the law) asserts that marijuana should be
regulated like alcohol and “individuals will possess the right to produce a
limited amount of marijuana for use personal use.” This support of personal
grow rights is woven throughout the text of this draft. It goes on to explain
the legislation’s strategy includes regulated “marijuana establishments” that
can cultivate, process, distribute, test and sell marijuana.

Definitions (2821)
The Definitions section has some extremely important points to note: 1) The new
adult use regulatory program will be under the Department of Gaming (2821.3).
This is a significant shift from the existing medical dispensary licensing
program with the Department of Health and Human Services (DHS)—more on that
below in the “What’s Bad” section following the summary.

2) Marijuana is defined by what it is not, rather than what
it is 2821.7). The most important of these distinctions is that Marijuana is
not industrial hemp. Industrial Hemp (2821.4) is defined as plants from “the
genus cannabis and any part of such plant” with a THC level of less than .03%.
This is significant because most all cannabis plants from the mildest indica to
the most potent sativa have a THC level of less than .03% until they reach the
flowering stage. This means that only mature THC bearing plants will matter on
plant count. Marijuana is also NOT the weight of other ingredients in various
edibles and preparations or “marijuana accessories.” Marijuana accessories
include “any equipment, products, or materials of any kind” for marijuana cultivation,
processing or consumption. This means an end to arrests for paraphernalia. Lastly
the definitions also explain the term, “Unreasonably impracticable,” meaning that
marijuana establishments will not be subjected to regulations that are so
extreme as to make impossible for a reasonable businessman to conduct
reasonable business.

Limitations (2822)

Of course there will still be limitations as to what a
person can do with marijuana: No operating a motor vehicle or consuming inside
the passenger compartment of one, unless it is in the living quarters of an RV
or something similar. No distributing marijuana to anyone under 21, no
marijuana in correctional facilities or schools (though we are calling for
excluding adult learning facilities, such as colleges and cosmetology schools).
No use of marijuana when it constitutes “negligence or professional malpractice.”
Employers and landlords will still be allowed to discriminate against marijuana
users in employment and housing. Of note: this section includes the disclaimer
that this law will not affect the provisions or protections of the AMMA. The
most important passage here is the reminder that a person will need a license
to do marijuana business. This is a reminder that there are opportunities for
entrepreneurs to enter the industry.

Rulemaking (2823)

Marijuana establishments will still be required to have
security and surveillance equipment on site and be able to track their
inventory. There will be a requirement for marijuana testing and labeling:
solvents, pollutants, THC, CBD and dosage per package. The state will create a “statewide
license class system” for licensing both unlimited and limited permits for
cultivation, processing, distributing, selling or testing marijuana. This
section explicitly states that the lower level license shall not exceed 1/3 of
the cost of the unlimited licenses. Consumers will not be required to present personal
information other than proof of age to purchase marijuana and no records are to
be kept or reported of a person’s purchases.

Local Control (2824)

Local governments (county and city governments) will still
have power to regulate marijuana in their jurisdictions, but cannot create
rules that are “unreasonably impracticable.” Currently this section also
includes the line that localities may enact rules restricting “consumption,
production, processing, manufacturing, and transportation of marijuana.” We are
calling for a change in this language to remove the word “transportation” and
add the word “public” to consumption. If different jurisdictions could restrict
transportation of marijuana then how could the average consumer keep track of
the maze of conflicting jurisdictions on the highways?

Licensing (2826)

Marijuana establishments are still prohibited within 300 of
churches and schools. Licenses will be awarded on merit, not random selection;
one establishment cannot hold multiple licenses in an area if it prohibits
competition. Ex-felons can apply for licenses after five years.

Licensing Fee
Schedule (2826.1)

The fee for being an unlimited cultivator is $30,000
(limited license is $10,000), renewal is $10,000. There are also new and
renewal license fees for processing, retail sales, distribution, and testing.
Of note, it goes on to say that if the state does not create sufficient
regulations and implementation in a timely manner, then applicants can apply
directly to their localities for licensing.

Operating
Requirements (2827)

The biggest change here is a lowering of the requirements
for outdoor cultivation security. Fencing will now need to be 8 feet tall and
marijuana operations must not be visible without “binoculars, aircraft or other
optical aids.” As expected, all marijuana establishments will be subject to inspection.

Personal Use and
Cultivation (2828)

No more civil forfeitures, consumers may purchase up to one
ounce of marijuana at a time or 5 grams of concentrate (we are calling for
higher limits) and transfer marijuana between friends. A person can grow 6
plants and a household a total of 12. Keeping in mind what is defined as a
marijuana plant, this should cover most patient needs. A key protection in this
section is the line that “a person shall not be penalized solely because of the
presence of metabolites” in their system. Another protection is the reminder
that a person shall not be punished in any way for hemp.

Marijuana Accessories
(2829)

The possession manufacture, sale and promotion of marijuana
accessories shall not be prohibited.

Lawful Operations
(2830)

This is a reminder that cultivating, processing, selling,
distributing and/or testing marijuana shall be legal if a person or business
has the proper licensing and employees shall not be subject to criminal
charges.

Identifying Underage
Persons (2831)

The Marijuana legalization movement must protect itself
against the continuing allegations that our efforts imperil youth. This section
is a reassurance that the new law will work to prevent underage people from
getting access to marijuana. It does specify however that youthful offenders
will get community service, not jail time, if they are caught smoking.

Penalties (2833)

As one could imagine, this section is the most controversial
passage in the draft. On the plus side, it does set almost all penalties at
misdemeanor or less (the exception is for chemical extraction of concentrates
without a license). On the negative side it does not spell out the penalties
for possession over one ounce or “intent to distribute.” Since these penalties
are not specified here, statute would revert to existing marijuana rules (ARS13-3405)
and these offenses (and any others not specified in the new language) would be
considered felonies. We urgently call for correction in this section.

Marijuana Fund (2834)

This section is still underwritten and does not clearly
specify where the moneys generated from marijuana will be spent. Safer AZ is
recommending the Department of Health (since we want this to stay in DHS),
Dept. of Ed, and law enforcement subsidies, since law enforcement will face a
tremendous decrease in their budgets with impending cuts in their marijuana enforcement
budgets.

This ballot measure also amends state statute regarding the
illicit drug schedule (ARS13-3401) and establishes a 15% tax on marijuana sales

3.Language protecting home cultivators from the
implied distinction between “concrete possession” and “actual possession.” An
example of why this is a problem: If two people have 6 plants each and live in
the same house, if the plants are co-mingled could either person be charged w
possessing all 12 plants? What if a person had 12 plants at their household and
was assisting someone at a separate location with their plants. Is that person
now in possession of both sets of plants? This issue can be settled with some
simple clarifying language.

4.Parenting and discrimination protections similar
to, though stronger than, those in the AMMA. Currently CPS can assert an
automatic “neglect finding” if a parent is found with marijuana or even
declares they have a medical card. We are calling for explicit protections
included that state “custody shall not be disturbed” for the legal possession
and usage of marijuana by parents.

What’s Good

By and large this draft satisfies
many of the concerns Safer AZ had about
grow rights and small business access. DUI provisions are good; citizen grow
rights include possessing ALL the marijuana produced on personal premises;
protections for marijuana accessory use and promotion is a real breakthrough;
as is the protection from false weights on marijuana preparations and edibles.

What’s Bad

The shift of licensing for adult
use marijuana from DHS to Department of Gaming, means a delay in new license implementation
until June of 2019 and that existing marijuana establishments will have to
apply for entirely separate licensing to expand into the adult market. This
will prohibit new investment into both the ballot measure’s campaign and the
industry. Unspecified penalties for larger possession and “intent to distribute”
offenses means those charges revert to existing state statutes and remain
severe felonies.

Recommendation:

SEND BACK FOR REVISIONS

A)keeping licensing for all marijuana
establishments in the existing DHS structure

B)excluding adult learning facilities from
prohibited locations

C)explicitly including the limited license fee
schedule in the fee section

E)requiring housing discrimination against
cannabis be explicitly written into housing leases

F)listing penalties for larger possession (greater
than one ounce) and “intent to distribute,” and having those penalties be
misdemeanors. Doing business without a license should result in civil
penalties, not criminal ones

G)Protections from potential unreasonable local
restrictions on private consumption and transportation of marijuana

H)Remove the delay date of June 2019, allow for
immediate implementation by existing dispensaries while they create their adult
use establishments and let new investors have access to the market

I)Completing the spending formula for the accrued
tax revenue to include: education, public health and law enforcement

We recommend the AZ cannabis
community accept this draft as a reasonable opening offer on the part of MPP to
show it values our concerns. MPP and members of the dispensary industry are
already contributed tens of thousands of dollars to the legalization movement.
Safer AZ urges the activist community to also consolidate our funds, along with
our recommendations to leverage MPP to incorporate our values and concerns into
their final language. To this end, Safer AZ reminds readers that we are a 527
political action committee able to take unlimited donations for or against a
ballot measure and not required to disclose our donors. Investors could invest
in Safer AZ to create a pool of money to support MPP’s work, without having to
directly contribute to MPP; but we are encouraging open good-faith negotiations
for the time being; and will keep you posted as developments change.

About Me

We are occupying the left coast of Arizona, disorganizing people from Yuma to Utah and the Colorado River to Cottonwood! This District was built for an Extremist Republican like the three talking heads that are running, Gould, Gosar, and Babeu. Please help us change the discussion in AZ CD 4. We need your support! Mikel Weisser is a social studies teacher, poet, and activist with progressive vision and energy.